In a fight of unknown quantities, Anthony Joshua’s level is the biggest question mark in his fight against Wladimir Klitschko

Anthony Joshua is the favourite in his fight against Wladimir Klitschko. Many of his casual fans, who probably don’t know who Wladimir Klitschko is, can’t fathom a scenario where he doesn’t share a ring with a fighter that’s already lost before the first bell. And while Joshua can only fight who’s put in front of him, the level at which he’s been assessed to operate at has been largely based on his mostly mediocre opposition.

Yet despite Joshua’s status as favourite, when it comes to his fight with Klitschko, we’re looking at a fight of unknown quantities. Is this fight too soon for Joshua? Can Joshua get past Klitschko’s jab? Can Klitschko’s chin, which has been exposed earlier in his career, withstand Joshua’s power? Was Klitschko’s loss to Fury just a bad night at the office for the Ukrainian or can we assume Father Time has called upon him? Has his hiatus from the ring since November 2015 resulted in ring rust? The questions are aplenty. But amidst them all, the biggest unknown is just how good is Joshua and is he as good as we’ve been led to believe?

While I think Joshua is a solidly good boxer, who can become an elite fighter, my immediate answer to the latter would be no. Joshua’s good but he’s not as good as we’ve been led to believe. That’s because his promoter Eddie Hearn, the Sky hype machine and the casuals have heaped so much hype upon him that we need to rein in any perception of the level he’s currently operating and restore some realism to what we’ve seen in his 18 fights.

Eddie Hearn has built Joshua’s career with incredible timing. Every opponent placed in front of Joshua has been been carefully considered to heavily dilute any risk while making Joshua look better than he arguably is and this fight is no different. Team Joshua’s thinking behind fighting Klitschko now is that he’s peaked, no longer represents a threat and is therefore ripe for as a perfectly timed 19th KO for Joshua. Meanwhile, Klitschko’s record and reign at the top means should Joshua get the W, he can legitimise all the hype around him without having to encounter a risk that is commensurate with the reward.

Though what if Hearn et al have taken in their own hype around Joshua, so much so that they’re unable to gauge the level he’s operating at? What if after 18 fights and 18 KOs, they’ve started to believe their own carefully constructed narrative that Joshua is invincible, compounded with a misguided risk assessment of Klitschko? If Klitschko turns up and isn’t the fighter that was made to look lacklustre by Tyson Fury, that isn’t the narrative Team Joshua will be anticipating. It’s also a narrative that would be the sternest test Joshua has had to date and a venture into uncharted waters where we don't know whether we’ll see Joshua sink or swim.

There’s no doubt that Joshua has explosive power and he puts his shots together with an ease that would suggest a more robust resume than he actually has. His hand speed is impressive as is his movement and ability to cut off the ring. Although his poor head movement, questionable chin and stamina seem to have been completely disregarded in assessing how he’ll fare against an opponent with a supreme jab, power and above all an attribute that Joshua doesn’t have in experience.

With 64 wins (and four losses), Klitschko has experience in abundance. He won’t be fazed by Joshua and if he wins this fight, it’ll be his experience trumping Joshua’s youth. Experience will be what mitigates any ring rust and experience will have mentally steered him back from his defeat against Fury. Experience is the ace that Joshua just doesn't have and it could be to his detriment.

Joshua doesn’t seem to have his usual air of confidence which could be telling of his lack of experience. In The Gloves are Off, which was hardly a barnstormer, Joshua seemed poised but his demeanour suggested he’s not as confident as usual. Perhaps he was merely showing Klitschko a level of respect his previous opponents didn’t warrant but in the media workout too, there were signs that his confidence may have been affected by the task ahead. Joshua can be heard to be asking several and constant questions of Rob McCracken. That’s a good sign of a fighter who is always seeking to learn and improve rather than assume the hubris many elite fighters adopt. Conversely, it could also be interpreted as having an air of needing reassurance in a fight where he’s less assured of the outcome.

I’ve long been critical of Klitschko’s ‘jab and grab’ style insofar as providing entertainment value but its effectiveness can’t be denied. With Joshua’s poor head movement (which I expect McCracken has sought to address), he could be a walking target for Klitschko’s jab and there’s also the question mark over how his chin will hold up against Klitschko’s shots. There’s also been uncertainty around whether and how Joshua will survive when he gets hit cleanly because he’s not used to it based on his gun shy opponents thus far. That isn’t just physically but mentally. Joshua is used to turning up and blasting his opponents out but should his fight with Klitschko deviate from that, there’s no real precedent for how he’ll deal with it.

Klitschko has the experience and patience, and a willingness to adopt a safety first approach en route to victory, that it’s unlikely he’ll go looking for a KO. If Joshua can’t neutralise Klitschko’s jab, I expect Klitschko would happily give us another jab and grab borefest performance for 12 rounds while navigating himself to a points win. There’s little chance of a tear up in this fight and that suits Klitschko. Whereas Joshua has come to be known as a knockout artist. But what happens if the knock out doesn’t come? Depending on the Klitschko that turns up, Joshua could be encountering a scenario unlike any he’s experienced in his professional career and no one knows how he’ll deal with it let alone if he’s able to.

A Joshua victory would be an amazing and deserved achievement. If Klitschko comes out on his a-game in the process, it would also answer a lot of the questions around just how good Joshua is. The casuals might not realise it but there are levels in boxing. And based on his fights to date, we just don’t know where Joshua’s level is. In a fight with so many unknowns, Joshua is taking a gamble in this being the fight where he seeks to provide those answers. Nonetheless, there’s a chance that he and his team don’t realise just how much of a risk they’re actually taking; especially if they’ve unknowingly taken in their own hype.

Britain is in a housing crisis that's being exacerbated by aggressive gentrification

A few years ago, I moved from one area of London to another. There wasn't anything particularly remarkable about my move and admittedly, I hardly downgraded in my new living arrangement. However, I had moved from where I had spent most of my life to date and was effectively priced out due to gentrification.

The tale of my neighbourhood is one that mirrors the experience of many others like it. Once a largely working class and ethnically diverse community, good transport links and banks’ lenient lending criteria made it ripe as a property hotspot that owner-occupier, buy-to-let and commercial buyers eyed as a solid investment.

Like many inner city areas, it wasn't without some social challenges including a notorious estate, high unemployment and high levels of deprivation. Nevertheless, that made properties cheaper to buy for anyone enterprising enough and able to realise what was happening.

Gradually, the character began to change. Property prices rose to exorbitant levels and newer, middle class residents were happy to pay the asking price. Local amenities reflected their desires while established local businesses struggled. New builds appeared, again attracting similar residents with prices that were clearly telling established locals that this was no longer their community. A socio-economic hostile takeover had now been effected.

Some reading this may argue that considering my earlier description, the neighbourhood needed to undergo a change. I can hear some rhetorically asking ‘surely neighbourhoods with challenging circumstances plus free market principles equals warranted gentrification?’ Granted, the neighbourhood was in need of improvements but not at the expense of its character and pricing out its residents.

Just as in other neighbourhoods, many sensing the opportunity scooped up properties as buy-to-let investments when they were at bargain basement prices. This was largely thanks to the pre-property boom era and Margaret Thatcher’s policy of Right to Buy (a scheme allowing social housing to be bought at a discount by tenants but often abused by third parties using tenants and their discount eligibility as a front). Although these buyers don't have any intention of charging affordable rents to working class locals. One could say they don't have to as they’re in the property market to make a profit. Though that leaves the local authorities to provide affordable social housing and there's a lack of social housing available to do so.

The overarching legacy of Right to Buy means that most social housing has been sold off and it hasn't been replaced (the expensive apartments courting ‘young professionals’ as their buyers or tenants couldn't be further from the social housing that should have been built in their place). And as for buying, for many people on modest incomes, even schemes such as shared ownership or Help to Buy (which presents its own problems) can remain elusive due to the traditional routes of raising a deposit via savings, inheritance or parental support being largely exclusive to the middle classes.

When Conservative MP Garvin Barwell suggested that the housing crisis be eased by grandparents leaving an inheritance to grandchildren rather than their own children, it might have been well meaning but it was hugely ignorant and suggestive of how clueless he is of a life beyond his own circle. For many, it’s an option that just doesn't exist; something that isn't a reality for Barwell and his peers.

Consequently, you have a section of society that has nowhere to turn for affordable, decent accommodation and is increasingly denied the routes to accessing it.

This is the crux of the housing crisis we're faced with; with a paucity of affordable housing that successive governments have failed to address, we're now seeing a restricting of access to such housing in traditionally working class neighbourhoods and to those who need it the most. Housing is instead being offered up to the middle classes because they’re the only ones that can afford it. It means they can profit while residents on low or modest incomes are displaced away from their families and their communities or subject to unacceptable living standards.

When I moved from the part of London I'm originally from, I was essentially priced out but I was hardly displaced. I was fortunate that there was still an element of choice in my decision to move but many others are not. A lack of affordable housing limits their choices and increasingly foists an unwanted move upon them that they're in no position to oppose. Indeed, many tenants who can’t move are effectively trapped until the inevitability of eviction.

Speak to teachers working in many inner city communities and they’ll tell you of many of their students’ families being forced to move away from the school. As a result, students are made to leave their friends and the stability offered by schools that youths need and crave. In addition to the bedroom tax and the benefit cap having the same effect, gentrification has meant that private landlords are increasing rents to levels that modest incomes just can't service. And a barely regulated private rental sector and insecure tenancies encourage these landlords’ attitudes.

Most of these families are hardworking people in employment, not the ‘benefit scroungers’ or 'chavs’ that the Daily Mail, Brexiters and Tories would have you think. So now the message is even if you work hard, you still can't be guaranteed of affordable, quality housing. Clearly the Conservative vision of ‘work hard and you can get anything’ doesn't apply to the working class.

For those families who don't move away from their community, the result is overcrowding, and often in local accommodation that many would consider squalor, because it remains the only affordable and local option. I lived in overcrowded accommodation for over a decade and know first hand how it affects children during their formative years.

Beyond the perpetual struggle to find somewhere to do your homework with adequate space, that’s conducive to studying without the noise and activity from the rest of the household, where do younger children especially play? Your interpersonal skills are hampered because you can't invite friends over due to a lack of space and you’re denied the space to just 'be’, which is crucial in your formative years but taken for granted by so many.

You see, the housing crisis isn't just about having somewhere to live. It affects families, children and their social and emotional growth and the stability that we all, especially children, desire in our lives. Adequately addressing it is more about providing the basic standards of living that most expect yet many are denied and gentrification therefore just makes a serious problem even worse.

Just as Brixton has been transformed beyond recognition since the Brixton riots in 1981, Tottenham is experiencing the same fate since its own unrest in 2011. But the 'regeneration’ being pushed by Tottenham Hotspur in building their new stadium is intensifying it.

Walk through Tottenham today and you’ll see shiny new estate agents popping up, poised for what they know is on the verge of happening with the already rapid appreciation of property prices in the area. Many social housing tenants have already been moved by Haringey Council to make way for the stadium’s expansion and many private tenants have been forced to move or evicted because their landlords have hiked their rents to reflect property value in the area.

Tottenham, like Brixton and many others before it, is changing. The vibrancy of the community is being traded for Tottenham Hotspur’s ambitions, which Haringey Council is happy to encourage and provide tokenistic scrutiny and checks and balances to. The lack of provision of affordable housing in the process is more than collateral damage. It's part of the socio-economic engineering that can be seen in our communities.

Under the guise of regeneration and improving communities for everyone, gentrification is providing a vehicle for the 'them and us’ neoliberal narrative. Furthermore, it also serves to push the worsening housing crisis. Families are displaced, health and well-being are affected and affordable housing becomes harder to find. The message from rampant and unchecked gentrification is that the middle classes deserve quality accommodation and a decent standard of living because they can afford it. Yet for others, it’s a basic right that society is happy to deny.